AAF Releases New Poll On Fiduciary Regulation

The American Action Forum (@AAF) and the American Action Network today released the results of a national survey examining public attitudes on the Department of Labor’s proposed regulation for financial advisers. Among the key findings, the survey found that Americans oppose the fiduciary regulation (50% to 28%), and are significantly less likely to support the proposed regulation when they hear about the personal impact this would have on middle class savers (73% less likely). 

AAF/AAN National Survey on Financial Adviser Regulation

The American Action Forum and American Action Network commissioned a national survey on the financial adviser regulation issued by the Department of Labor. The national survey was conducted by On Message, Inc. The national survey found that:

Americans oppose the fiduciary regulation (50% to 28%), and are significantly less likely to support the proposed regulation when they hear about the personal impact this would have on middle class savers (73% less likely).  A strong majority (59% to 26%) doesn’t believe it’s the government’s job to decide what’s best for an individual’s personal retirement accounts. Americans believe the Department of Labor lacks the expertise and relevance of running individual Americans’ IRA’s (69% to 20%).

The Daily Dish

In his 2,312 days in office, President Obama’s administration has finalized 2,210 new regulations that impose a new compliance burden of $659.6 billion. That “One-a-Day” pace means that the regulatory burden has risen by an average of $285 million per day; $11 million per hour; $198,000 per minute; or $3,300 per second of his time in office. Put differently, the regulatory burden has risen by roughly $100 billion per year or $1 trillion over the 10-year budget window.

Inability to Understand Health Insurance Costs Consumers Hundreds of Dollars

Most people have a difficult time fully understanding their health insurance coverage, resulting in financial loss. The inability to accurately evaluate the various cost-sharing mechanisms leads many people to select a financially-dominated insurance plan—a plan which, given the premium and cost-sharing amounts, is economically suboptimal. For instance, spending $625 more in annual premium costs for a $500 lower deductible is economically irrational; yet, as shown below, the majority of people make that kind of mistake. A recent report analyzes the costs which result from these suboptimal choices. While people consider many factors besides cost when selecting health insurance, most of these preference differences were eliminated in this study and the problem persisted: 55 percent chose a financially-dominated plan.  The average savings which could be achieved by switching from various dominated plans are shown.

The Real History of Title II and Investment

Recently the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a new set of regulations for the Internet reclassifying broadband as a utility under Title II in order to achieve “network neutrality.”   In part, the change was supported by the view that it would “not have a negative impact on investment and innovation in the Internet marketplace as a whole.” But the logic and the record that the FCC lays out is filled with egregious errors.

The Daily Dish

With another round of weak economic data and the specter of prolonged growth at the anemic pace of 2.1 percent per year, one would think that proposals to raise economic growth would be of central importance. The beginning of the 2016 White House race has delivered some proposals — candidates Rubio, Paul, Perry, Huckabee, Cruz and Christie have all discussed tax reform ideas as a central part of growing more rapidly — and candidates Bush and Christie have laid out specific growth targets.

Loading more entries